Regulators are taking auditors to task over their rigor around some of the accounting issues that proved especially volatile through the economic crisis.

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has published a report summarizing its observations after inspecting audits performed while credit market seized and the economy plunged into depression. The report says auditors generally didn’t adhere adequately to PCAOB standards when it came to some of the toughest areas in financial reporting through the credit crisis – namely fair value measurements, goodwill impairments, indefinite-lived intangible assets and other long-lived assets, allowances for loan losses, off-balance-sheet structures, revenue recognition, inventory and income taxes.

The report says firms have made some headway in responding to the increased risks that erupted with the economic crisis, but it also implores them to keep at it. Through future inspection cycles, the PCAOB says it will continue to focus on whether firms have adequately addressed quality control deficiencies that have been pointed out the past few years. The board is especially interested in how firms are focusing on audit risks raised by the ongoing effects of economic strife.

The PCAOB also reveals in the report that it has referred a number of audit deficiencies to its enforcement office for further investigation, including cases involving financial services firms. However, the board is prohibited from discussing investigations until cases are settled in private.

The secrecy of the PCAOB’s enforcement process is becoming increasingly frustrating to the board, in fact. Calling it “the most pressing issue” facing his office, Claudius B. Modesti, director of enforcement, joined the board in calling on Congress to amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to allow the PCAOB to conduct its enforcement proceedings publicly.

In a recent speech, Mostesti said the concealed enforcement process denies investors information about allegations of misconduct and gives those who are accused an incentive to draw out the process to stall any public disclosures. That drains PCAOB resources and constrains the board from using the disciplinary process as a deterrent, he said.

In addition to enforcement measures, the PCAOB also reveals in its report that it will take its findings into account as it conducts future inspections and considers new audit rules or new guidance for auditors. The board said audit committees should use the report in the meantime to guide dialogue with its financial reporting management and its external auditor.

Internally, for example, audit committees might want to check with management on how the company handles the hot-button accounting areas that the PCAOB identifies as problematic, how the company documents its decisions and what type of information it provides to auditors, the board said.

The report also suggests audit committees talk with their auditors about how the auditor is assessing audit risk in the areas raised by the PCAOB, what strategy the auditor is following to address those risks, and the results of audit procedures that are performed in relation to those risks.

PCAOB Acting Chairman Daniel L. Goelzer said in a statement, “These inspection observations underscore the need for auditors to be diligent in assessing and responding to emerging areas of risk when economic and business conditions change.”